It looks like Judge Neil Gorsuch would have an easier time making it to the U.S. Supreme Court if voters -- rather than U.S. Senators -- had to confirm him.

That’s according to the latest Fox News Poll of registered voters nationwide.

President Donald Trump nominated Judge Gorsuch to fill the vacancy created by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death. If Gorsuch is confirmed by the Senate, it will likely be a razor-thin victory. Yet voters give him a 12-point edge.

The new poll, released Wednesday, finds that by a 49-37 percent margin, voters would confirm Gorsuch. Fourteen percent are undecided.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL FOX NEWS POLL.

Not surprisingly, 82 percent of Republicans would vote to confirm him compared to just 17 percent of Democrats. For independents, a majority supports Trump’s nominee (54 percent). There’s a gender gap as well, as 57 percent of men vs. 42 percent of women are in favor of Gorsuch.

The support for Gorsuch’s confirmation (49 percent) is higher than the 39 percent received by President Obama’s nomination of Elena Kagan in May 2010. However it is a touch lower than the 53 percent who supported Obama’s nomination of Sonia Sotomayor in July 2009 and the 51 percent who were behind President George W. Bush’s selection of John Roberts in July 2005.

Senate confirmation hearings are expected in March. Democrats have threatened quite a fight, and 42 percent of voters endorse the idea of Senate Democrats doing “everything they can” to block any of Trump’s nominees they don’t like. Of course most Democrats agree with that strategy (75 percent) -- and they’re joined by one-third of independents (33 percent) and even a handful of Republicans (10 percent).

“Democrats are at the very least giving their elected leaders permission to fight Trump's nominees while many will be demanding they do anything to slow the administration,” says Democratic pollster Chris Anderson, who conducts the Fox News Poll with Republican counterpart Daron Shaw. “And with the sense that blood is in the water after General Flynn's forced resignation, that demand could increase.”

The poll also asks voters which of the three branches of government they trust the most. Hands down it is the judicial branch at 45 percent. The other two trail far behind: 26 percent trust the executive branch the most and the legislative branch comes in at 13 percent. Ten percent don’t trust any of the branches.

Sentiment hasn’t changed much since the early days of the Obama administration. At that time, 43 percent of voters trusted the court the most, 27 percent the president, and 15 percent Congress (April 2012).

The number picking the judiciary is up from 33 percent when the question was first asked in 2005.

"The judiciary generally, and the Supreme Court particularly, are seen as relatively competent and non-partisan," says Shaw. "That makes President Trump's response to the opinions on the district and appellate judges' rulings on his immigration order a gamble politically."

Fox News Poll 2.15 (3)
Expand / Contract

Around half of voters think the Supreme Court’s decisions are “about right” ideologically (47 percent). That’s up from 34 percent who felt that way in 2015 -- and up from the previous high of 46 percent in 2010.

Thirty-one percent feel the court’s decisions are “too liberal.” That’s down significantly from 45 percent in July 2015, soon after rulings on same-sex marriage and the 2010 health care law (Obamacare) were handed down.

Only about one in five voters say the court is “too conservative” (18 percent).

Pollpourri

Americans are used to cameras in big criminal trials -- what about televising the Supreme Court?

The Fox News poll is based on landline and cellphone interviews with 1,013 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide and was conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R) from February 11-13, 2017. The poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points for all registered voters.

( ted cruz is predicting another vacancy in the near future and that the battle to fill it will be massive )

Ted Cruz: 'Odds are very good' of Supreme Court vacancy this summer

Published February 23, 2017
· FoxNews.com

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz told "Special Report with Bret Baier" Thursday that "I think the odds are very good" that a second seat on the Supreme Court will fall vacant this year.

"If not this summer, next summer," Cruz told Bret Baier. "You know, judges don’t like it when people kind of nudge them out, so they’ll go when they decide to go."

Cruz stressed that he had "no inside information" about any possible vacancy, but noted that "that most of my professional career has been as a Supreme Court litigator and I know the Court well."

IN RARE CONCESSION, TOP DEM PREDICTS GORSUCH WILL BE CONFIRMED

President Trump has nominated Neil Gorsuch to succeed the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who died last year at the age of 79. Cruz did not specify which justice he believed would retire, but two of the remaining eight justices on the court — liberal Ruth Bader Ginsburg and swing vote Anthony Kennedy — are in their 80s.

Cruz said the battle over whoever is appointed to fill the forthcoming vacancy would be "Armageddon."

"[This] is going to be the opportunity to shift the course of this court [and] put a five-justice majority of Constitutionalists on the court," Cruz said, adding that Republicans "need to be prepared to take the case to the American people."

Cruz, who has been put forward as a potential Supreme Court candidate, told Baier that he was "very happy in the Senate."

The senator also had harsh words for Washington Democrats, saying that many are "out of their minds."

"They’re really angry. They’re angry not at Republicans, not even at Trump. They’re angry at the American people. They’re angry at the voters: ‘How dare you elect a Republican president and Republican majorities in both houses?’" Cruz said. "The Democrats are not in the mode of raising reasonable questions. They’re in the mode of losing their minds, of screaming – it’s not showing respect for the democratic process, it’s not showing respect for the voters. I think that’s unfortunate.

In an isolated area of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in the White House complex, Judge Neil Gorsuch has spent the past few days being put through the rhetorical ringer. For hours on end, he sat alone at a table, peppered with questions about his personal and professional record, all in an effort to see if he would crack under the pressure.

The informal, but intrusive prep sessions are known as "murder boards" for their intensity, designed to simulate what the 49-year-old nominee to the Supreme Court will face in his Senate confirmation hearing starting Monday.

"He's a home run, he's smooth, he's going to go through great," said Thomas Dupree, a former Bush deputy assistant attorney general. "The [opposing] senators will take their shots, but I think he's close to a lock."

The stakes are enormous, not only for the nominee but also for the man who selected him from a list of 21 potential candidates announced during the presidential campaign. Aides say President Trump hopes a successful confirmation will build momentum for his separate political agenda, and bring a measure of stability and public confidence to what has been a challenging two months in office.

In the broader realm, filling the seat left by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia will ensure the high court keeps a shaky right-leaning majority. And having that fifth conservative vote will help guide the administration as it makes strategic decisions about which high-profile issues to pursue in court-- like immigration, the environment, transgender rights and expanded executive authority.

"It's important Democrats and Republicans not roll over on this pick," said Elizabeth Wydra, president of the left-leaning Constitutional Accountability Center. "The American people want their justices to be an independent check even to the president nominating you, to follow the Constitution, not their own political values."

Gorsuch will face a mixed reception, as Republicans largely welcome the nominee and some Democrats look for a line of attack – though they’ve been distracted lately by other battles over the GOP bid to replace ObamaCare and the president’s disputed claims about “wiretapping.” With their attention elsewhere, Gorsuch has been preparing.

Along with his courtesy visits to more than 70 members of the Senate who will decide his fate, Gorsuch has prepared for the spotlight by reviewing his own record, and enduring those closely guarded mock hearings.

The private rehearsals were coordinated by the White House Counsel's Office, and included more than a dozen participants -- government lawyers, conservative academics, and some of his former law clerks. The goal is to anticipate every possible line of questioning and danger zone -- to give measured answers but not reveal too much.

Sources say Gorsuch has settled in being himself, avoiding unscripted responses that might provide the televised "soundbite" to derail what has so far been a flawless confirmation journey.

Administration officials are privately confident he will shine in the hearings.

Republicans point to Gorsuch's unanimous 2006 confirmation to his appeals court seat as a template to blunt any efforts to filibuster this time.

Sources expect him to repeat in the upcoming hearings what he said 11 years ago, about the kind of judge he considered unacceptable: "Someone who is not willing to listen with an open mind to the arguments of counsel, to his colleagues, to precedent."

His appointment fundamentally changes the Supreme Court for decades;
He potentially could be on the bench for 30+ years.

I am surprised at the minimal resistance from the left compared to other far less wide reaching issues.

he doesn't really change the balance as he'd be replacing a former " conservative leaning " judge

I've read that it actually be the next opening that we should expect fireworks over and a much harder fight to confirm a nominee

I also think the democrats have looked at the polls and the fact there was little anger from average voters over the idea of Gorsuch as a judge , its only the far left in American politics that really seems worked up over his appointment

His appointment fundamentally changes the Supreme Court for decades;
He potentially could be on the bench for 30+ years.

I am surprised at the minimal resistance from the left compared to other far less wide reaching issues.

he doesn't really change the balance as he'd be replacing a former " conservative leaning " judge

I've read that it actually be the next opening that we should expect fireworks over and a much harder fight to confirm a nominee

I also think the democrats have looked at the polls and the fact there was little anger from average voters over the idea of Gorsuch as a judge , its only the far left in American politics that really seems worked up over his appointment

It does in a way;
Lets keep in mind the appointments by the last President.

Justice Souter a more Liberal leaning Judge was replaced with a far more Liberal Leaning Judge in Justice Sotomayor

Then you had Justice Stevens who moved more to the Liberal side toward the end of his tenure replaced with Justice Kagan who largely kept that position;

Then Justice Scalia was to be replaced with Merrick Garland who was likely no where near as Conservative as Justice Scalia was.

Having Gorsuch in conjunction with the current make up on the court is a just win for Conservatives.

Especially if another vacancy can be filled during this administration;
It would fundamentally change the court for decades.

Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch vowed Monday to be a “faithful servant of the Constitution” and “apply the law impartially,” during the first day of his Senate confirmation hearings that repeatedly exposed the partisan divide in Washington.

“I pledge to each of you and to the American people that, if confirmed, I will do all my powers permit to be a faithful servant of the Constitution and laws of our great nation,” said Gorsuch, who spoke at the end of the roughly four-hour Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.

Gorsuch, a respected, highly-credentialed judge and conservative member of the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, attempted in his remarks to bridge the political divide and become President Trump’s replacement for conservative Justice Antonin Scalia.

“In my decade on the bench, I have tried to treat all who come to court fairly and with respect,” said Gorsuch, his voice cracking a few times. “I have ruled for disabled students, prisoners and workers alleging civil rights violations. Sometimes, I have ruled against such persons, too. But my decisions have never reflected a judgment about the people before me -- only my best judgment about the law and facts at issue in each particular case.”

The hearing opened with Chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa expressing his views on the high court before championing Gorsuch, saying judges “play a limited role” in government and are “not free to update the Constitution.”

“That’s not their job," he said. "That power is retained by the people, acting through their elected representatives,” Grassley said before arguing the Obama administration tried rewriting federal laws “dozens of times.”

His remarks were followed by California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the committee, immediately making clear her frustration about the Republican-led Senate refusing to hold hearings last year for her party’s pick -- Judge Merrick Garland -- to the fill the open Supreme Court seat.

“I just want to say that I’m deeply disappointed that under these circumstances that we begin our hearing,” said Feinstein, who raised questions about Gorsuch’s positons on such issues as abortion and Second Amendment rights.

“For those of us on our side … our job is to determine whether he will protect the legal and constitutional rights of all Americans, not just the powerful and the wealthy,” she continued.

Gorsuch, 49, returns to the Senate chamber on Tuesday.

Each of the committee’s 17 members will then get at least 50 minutes of questions over two rounds.

Grassley said the committee is scheduled to vote April 3 on the Gorsuch nomination, with a full Senate vote expected early next month.

Gorsuch is expected to clear both votes, considering Republicans have the Senate majority.

“No matter your politics … you should be concerned about the preservation of our constitutional order and the separation of powers,” Grassley said. “And if you are concerned about these things, as you should be, meet Judge Neil Gorsuch. We have before us today a nominee whose body of professional work is defined by an unfailing commitment to these principles.”

Though Gorsuch’s record has also been praised by some left-leaning legal scholars, several Senate Democrats have already signaled their intentions to oppose his nomination, amid the larger effort to stop Trump at essentially every turn.

But delay tactics by Democrats could lead Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., to exercise procedural maneuvers of his own to eliminate the 60-vote filibuster threshold now in place for Supreme Court nominations, and with it any Democratic leverage to influence the next Supreme Court fight.

Time and again Monday, committee Democrats attempted to tie Gorsuch to Trump and railed against Senate Republican leaders’ decision to wait until after the November presidential election to fill the Scalia seat.

Delaware Sen. Chris Coons said Garland was treated with “deep and historic disrespect.”

Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal, a fellow Democrat, argued that Trump has launched “vicious attacks” and made “demeaning comments” against judges.

“These times are not ordinary,” he said.

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, a GOP committee member and former Supreme Court clerk, said Scalia had a modest view of the law and that his “legacy would be at stake,” had former-President Obama or 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton nominated a replacement.

“My Democratic colleagues feel they have no choice to manufacture attacks to protect themselves in primaries back home,” he also said.

Gorsuch also repeatedly thanked his wife, children, mentors and others.

“I could not even attempt this without Louise, my wife of more than 20 years,” he said before citing Scalia as a mentor.

“He reminded us that the judge’s job is to follow the words that are in the law -- not replace them with words that aren’t,” Gorsuch added.

Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch, peppered with questions for hours from senators trying to pry loose his views on a host of hot-button cases, responded Tuesday with a consistent answer: His job is to follow the law, and set aside his personal beliefs.

Like past nominees in confirmation hearings dating back decades, President Trump’s pick was loath to reveal his opinion on seminal court rulings during his turn before the Senate Judiciary Committee. But, with a disarming and amicable manner that rarely wavered, the appeals court judge repeatedly stressed that what matters is his independence, respect for precedent and willingness to hear the facts and keep an open mind on the cases before him.

“I’m a fair judge,” he vowed, under questioning from the committee’s top Democrat, California Sen. Dianne Feinstein.

Put another way, he told Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, “A good judge doesn’t give a whit about politics, or the political implications of his or her decision.”

The nominee faced lawmakers’ questions for the first time at Tuesday’s hearing. The 10th Circuit judge is virtually assured support from majority Republicans but on Tuesday sought to assuage Democrats’ concerns he would effectively serve as a reliable conservative vote on a split court, if confirmed to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

Gorsuch insisted he would never be “a rubber stamp.”

Lawmakers of both parties specifically pressed on whether Gorsuch would be willing to rule against the president who nominated him.

“I have no difficulty ruling against or for any party, other than based on what the law and the facts of a particular case require,” Gorsuch said, adding, “There’s no such thing as a Republican judge or a Democratic judge, we just have judges in this country.”

Gorsuch even quipped that it was “a softball” when Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, asked if he would have any trouble breaking with Trump.

During a tricky line of questioning from Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., on whether Trump could face prosecution for reinstating waterboarding, Gorsuch said, “No man is above the law.”

The tone of the hearing was mostly cordial, but grew tense at times.

In a raw moment under questioning from Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, Gorsuch said there’s a lot about the confirmation process he regrets.

"I regret putting my family through this," he said. "But it is what it is."

Whitehouse questioned the nominee on the role of money in politics and chided him for not giving a definitive answer when asked about keeping distance from interests before the court.

“If you don’t know that, you’re going to have a very hard time figuring out how to make the right call,” Whitehouse said.

Democrats throughout the hearing tried to discern Gorsuch’s views on issues ranging from abortion rights to campaign finance to gun control – as well as probe his role in defending Bush-era interrogation policies while in that administration’s Justice Department.

Gorsuch has not ruled directly on the right to an abortion, and was pressed on the topic by Feinstein. He said that legalized abortion is “precedent” and “worthy of treatment as precedent like any other.”

Graham later asked Gorsuch whether Trump had asked him to overturn Roe v. Wade. The nominee answered no, and said that if Trump had, “I would have walked out the door.”

On the major gun rights case known in short-hand as “Heller,” he also said that it’s the “law of the land.”

Asked by Feinstein whether he agreed with the decision overturning a sweeping handgun ban in the nation’s capital, he said, “It’s not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing.”

On the sidelines, Trump weighed in on Twitter, calling him “someone with a brilliant legal mind & a commitment to constitutional principles.”

The hearing followed an initial day of opening statements, where Democrats and Republicans traded partisan barbs and Gorsuch himself tried to cut through the discord – vowing to be a “faithful servant of the Constitution” and apply the law “impartially.”

Democrats have their doubts, however, and signaled in advance they would have tough questions for Gorsuch during what is expected to be nearly a full week of hearings.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., on Tuesday seemingly tried to get Gorsuch to tip his hand as to how he views the ongoing court challenges to the Trump administration’s attempted suspension of travel and immigration from six Muslim-majority countries and the refugee program.

Leahy asked more broadly about the constitutionality of religious tests, to which Gorsuch said he would “apply the law.” When given the example of a religious test in the military, Gorsuch said that, specifically, is against the law, while declining to comment on the current case.

An exchange with Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., was particularly tense, as the senator grilled him on everything from the Hobby Lobby case concerning the right of religious nonprofits to skirt ObamaCare’s contraceptive mandate to gay rights.

Gorsuch assured Durbin the Supreme Court has held same-sex marriage is “protected by the Constitution.”

Democrats are still smarting over Senate Republicans’ refusal to consider former President Barack Obama’s nominee for the same seat, Judge Merrick Garland. Amid the yearlong delay, Trump won election and was able to nominate Gorsuch instead. That history hung over the start of Gorsuch’s hearings.

Leahy charged Monday that Gorsuch was selected by “extreme interest groups” and named by a president who lost the popular vote, and reiterated those concerns Tuesday.

While Monday marked the opening day of his confirmation hearings, that session was largely overshadowed by FBI Director James Comey’s explosive appearance before the House intelligence committee where he confirmed a long-running probe into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential race, including possible links to the Trump campaign.

His appointment fundamentally changes the Supreme Court for decades;
He potentially could be on the bench for 30+ years.

I am surprised at the minimal resistance from the left compared to other far less wide reaching issues.

he doesn't really change the balance as he'd be replacing a former " conservative leaning " judge

I've read that it actually be the next opening that we should expect fireworks over and a much harder fight to confirm a nominee

I also think the democrats have looked at the polls and the fact there was little anger from average voters over the idea of Gorsuch as a judge , its only the far left in American politics that really seems worked up over his appointment

It does in a way;
Lets keep in mind the appointments by the last President.

Justice Souter a more Liberal leaning Judge was replaced with a far more Liberal Leaning Judge in Justice Sotomayor

Then you had Justice Stevens who moved more to the Liberal side toward the end of his tenure replaced with Justice Kagan who largely kept that position;

Then Justice Scalia was to be replaced with Merrick Garland who was likely no where near as Conservative as Justice Scalia was.

Having Gorsuch in conjunction with the current make up on the court is a just win for Conservatives.

Especially if another vacancy can be filled during this administration;
It would fundamentally change the court for decades.

I think it is also significant that Trump picked such a spotless candidate. Remember when George W Bush nominated his secretary -- almost. I think Sottomayor and Kagen are disgusting, in terms of the classical judicial virtues. Trump has picked someone that's so 'brainy' you'd think he glowed in the dark, by contrast.

It's the same with his cabinet. It's an impressive team. He seems to be able to spot talent.

As Judge Neil Gorsuch breezed through the home stretch of confirmation hearings Thursday, Senate Democrats' struck a defiant public posture while looking behind the scenes for a possible deal that could set up the next Supreme Court nomination battle.

Gorsuch, the 49-year-old 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals judge, came through three days of grueling hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee largely unscathed. With confirmation by the full Senate looming, sources told Fox News Democrats were weighing a number of strategic options -- including a stand down in exchange for a GOP pledge to not go "nuclear" on a future nomination by President Trump -- despite their public statements.

"He will have to earn 60 votes for confirmation,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Thursday, referring to the threshold for ending a filibuster and preventing the minority party from blocking the confirmation.

But after even Gorsuch's critics conceded the squeaky-clean, Harvard-trained jurist deftly parried his Democratic critics' questions and came off as likeable and intelligent, Schumer's vow is likely more bargaining stance than threat, sources said. Gorsuch was nominated January 31 to fill the seat of the late Justice Antonin Scalia. Confirmation hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee will conclude, but the nominee finished his testimony on Wednesday.

Republicans, who hold 52 seats in the upper chamber, have the option of changing Senate rules so that a filibuster can be ended with a simple majority vote. Democrats, when in the majority during the Obama administration, made the rules change effective for all non-Supreme Court nominations.

Democrats are leery of pressing the ongoing confirmation process to the point Republicans invoke the so-called nuclear option, as it would make a subsequent Trump nomination a fait accompli. But on Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell expressed doubt that any Democrats would vote to confirm Gorsuch, a strong signal the Kentucky Republican is ready to change the rule.

“It does sound like he’s laying the groundwork for the nuclear option,” Senate Minority Whip Richard Durbin said of McConnell. “Let’s wait and see how this evolves.”

Trump Adviser for the Supreme Court Leonard Leo scoffed at the idea Republicans could be pressured into withholding the nuclear option in exchange for Gorsuch's confirmation.

“This absurd ‘deal’ would prolong an environment in which Democrat Supreme Court nominees get up or down simple majority votes and Republican nominees get filibustered -- that’s not a deal, it’s a unilateral disarmament,” Leo said.

Democrats from states that supported Trump in the presidential election could find themselves under pressure from voters to not appear obstructionist, especially to an appealing nominee. But Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa., who is up for re-election in 2018, said Thursday he would not vote for Gorsuch.

“After considering his nomination seriously and without pre-judgment, and mindful of the awesome responsibility of passing judgments on nominees to the highest court in the nation, I do not believe Judge Gorsuch’s judicial approach will ensure fairness for workers and families in Pennsylvania,” Casey said. “I have concluded that Judge Gorsuch is not the right choice to fulfill this commitment -- I will not support his nomination.”

The vote could take place as early as Monday, but Democrats are expected to ask for a one-week delay, pushing the Committee vote to April 3, and then immediately to the Senate floor.

Top Senate Republicans said they would do what they needed to do to get Gorsuch through to the bench.

His appointment fundamentally changes the Supreme Court for decades;
He potentially could be on the bench for 30+ years.

I am surprised at the minimal resistance from the left compared to other far less wide reaching issues.

Cosmo's comment highlights how these nomination battles have changed over the years. The original intent of the Constitution was that the President had the right to nominate Supreme Court judges, subject to the advice and consent of the Senate. The hearings were generally pro forma, since all the nominees were of a certain calibre, and they simply adjudicated disputes according to the law.

But with Roe vrs Wade, all that changed. There has been a 'abortion rights' test for Supreme Court judges. It has gotten more and more intense on the Democrat's part. They oppose any nominee that is less than an advocate of abortion.

Now it is generalizing to political ideology. Gorsuch's problem is that he's a Republican.
The Democrat's problem is they can't find an objection to him that sticks. They should give way.

His appointment fundamentally changes the Supreme Court for decades;
He potentially could be on the bench for 30+ years.

I am surprised at the minimal resistance from the left compared to other far less wide reaching issues.

Cosmo's comment highlights how these nomination battles have changed over the years. The original intent of the Constitution was that the President had the right to nominate Supreme Court judges, subject to the advice and consent of the Senate. The hearings were generally pro forma, since all the nominees were of a certain calibre, and they simply adjudicated disputes according to the law.

Agreed;
My point is more to the fact that we have seen protests in the streets over lesser issues.

Gorsuch's appointment isnt something that can be undone by "the next guy" this is likely the most far reaching item this President has accomplished and the Liberals seem to be heading out with a whimper.

Key Democrat comes out against Gorsuch, may be indicator of things to come

By Edmund DeMarche
·Published March 28, 2017
· FoxNews.com

Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., said Monday that he intends to filibuster the nomination of President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Hon. Neil Gorsuch.

The announcement of a Democrat coming out against Gorsuch is not a notable news item, but Nelson is seen as a centrist. Republicans were relying on centrists like Nelson to carry the Colorado jurist to the 60 votes needed to avoid a Democratic block.

Nelson made the announcement in a statement released from his office. He said he met with Gorsuch and entered the hearings with an “open mind.” His concerns seemed to echo those of his colleagues on his side of the aisle.

“The judge has consistently sided with corporations over employees, ad in the case of a freezing truck driver who, contrary to common sense, Judge Gorsuch would have allowed to be fired for abandoning his disabled rig during extreme weather conditions,” he wrote.

The Wall Street Journal reported that as of Tuesday afternoon, more than two dozen Senate Democrats said they would vote no on Gorsuch’s nomination. No Democrat had said he would vote yes.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee said in a statement reported by Politico that in 2006 “Nelson voted for cloture to end the filibuster on Judge Alito’s nomination. The same year, Nelson joined his Senate colleagues to confirm Judge Gorsuch to the Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit in a unanimous vote. Clearly Nelson has been in Washington way too long and is forgetting he represents Florida, not Washington liberals.”

Gorsuch’s confirmation to the high court appears to be very likely. He will benefit from a Republican-controlled Senate. He needs 60 total votes. Republicans hold 52 seats. Ten Democrats represent states that voted for President Trump in November. And, Republicans can “go nuclear” and change the rule to confirm Gorsuch to a simple majority.

Supporters of Gorsuch said Democrats tried their best to land blows against Trump’s nominee. Perhaps one of the Democrats’ most effective exchange during the confirmation hearings came in a line of questioning from Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn.

Franken asked Gorsuch how he could rule in favor of a company that fired a truck driver who abandoned his trailer on the side of an interstate on a -14 degree night. Alphonse Maddin, the driver, noticed that his trailer’s brakes were frozen and his heater did not work.

Maddin unhitched his trailer and drove off to wait somewhere warm. Gorsuch wrote that the company gave him the legal option to wait with his trailer.

“I had a career in identifying absurdity,” Franken, a former member of “Saturday Night Live,” said. “I know it when I see it, and it makes me question your judgement.”

Pam Keith, a 2016 U.S. Senate candidate considering a bid against Nelson, said in a text message to Politico that “Nelson VERY much is feeling the pressure, as are many Dems in DC.”

“Bottom-line is that the base is far more strident than they are,” Keith continued. “The grassroots could give a damn about ‘collegiality' or decorum in the halls of Congress. I think the leaders are learning that the appetite for outright obstruction is as high on our side as it ever was for the Tea Party.”

( so far only 1 democrat has said they'll vote for Gorsuch even though there is little public opposition to him joining the supreme court and many of these same senators voted to allow him to join other lower courts in the past )

Gorsuch Confirmation

Manchin becomes first Senate Dem to back Gorsuch

Brooke Singman

By Brooke Singman
·Published March 30, 2017
· FoxNews.com

Sen. Joe Manchin said Thursday that he would support Judge Neil Gorsuch for the Supreme Court, becoming the first Democrat to back President Trump's choice.

“Senators have a constitutional obligation to advice (sic) and consent on a nominee to fill this Supreme Court vacancy and, simply put, we have a responsibility to do our jobs as elected officials,” Manchin said in a statement Thursday. “I will vote to confirm him to be the ninth justice on the Supreme Court.”

More than half of Senate Democrats already have come out against Gorsuch, and are planning to support a filibuster if it comes to that. So far, only Manchin and Heidi Heitkamp, a Democrat from North Dakota, have indicated they would oppose a filibuster.

This week, Vice President Mike Pence was in West Virginia, Manchin’s home state, urging that he vote ‘yes’ for Gorsuch.

“Throughout Judge Gorsuch’s career, he has come to his legal rulings objectively, through the letter of the law rather than through his own opinion,” Manchin said. “I hold no illusions that I will agree with every decision Judge Gorsuch may issue in the future, but I have not found any reasons why this jurist should not be a Supreme Court Justice.”

The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to vote on April 3. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-K.Y., said they plan to vote to confirm Gorsuch on the Senate floor on April 7.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou can attach files in this forumYou can download files in this forum